Excellent synopsis Rob of this past week of CPC & LPC campaigning in BC urban and rural: “They might as well have been on two different planets.”
I’m in one of the incumbent BC ridings that NDP Premier Eby half heartedly endorsed for NDP support: Similkameen-South Okanagan-West Kootenay.
A few days ago, I had the privilege of a Halifax NS person arguing to me on X that in my riding the Liberals will beat the NDP because that’s what a national poll showed (I think Canada 338 broken down to riding specific projections).
I tried to explain that BC is weird: outside of super wealthy urban areas (West Van, North Van, Van Central, White Rock), the Liberals are not competitive here. Our split is all NDP and Conservative in BC. The last time Vancouver Island ridings (Victoria, Nanaimo, etc) elected a Liberal was in 2008. I mean, last year pre-provincial Fall election, our long-standing prov. party the BC Liberals actually tried to completely disassociate itself from the feds by changing their name to BC United (it didn’t work, they folded entirely, and were consumed by the BC Conservatives before election).
In 2021, the Liberals came in 3rd by popular vote here (CPC 33%, NDP 29%, LPC 26%, Green5%).
BC is its own phenomenon politically.
Something too, that I think the national poll projections miss entirely, is the hyperlocal of politics, particularly in rural BC ridings. It matters here who the local candidates are and what they’ve specifically contributed to their community. In our riding, the newly placed Liberal candidate is an Indigenous leader, but from Enderby (out of riding) and not from our local Band (PIB). She will not be elected and is merely a placeholder for the LPC - they know this and have historically parachuted in a candidate, because they’re NOT competitive here. The NDP are running a well know figure (assistant to prior incumbent) and the CPC are running a long-time Penticton city councilwoman. Both good options for an area that split NDP39%, CPC38%, LPC13% in the federal 2021 election.
I’m interested to see how the leaders’ BC campaign choices play out in terms of votes and seats. Will the Liberals pick up seats on the Island from the NDP (as they obviously hope to do by campaigning in Vic)? Will the Conservatives win closely contested seats from the Interior and North like mine in Pen?
Bree, in my riding of West Vancouver Squamish Sunshine Coast, the NDP decided to run an 18yr old recently graduated from high school. And he was acclaimed as the candidate! The NDP seem to have given and I’ll likely give up my vote to someone else.
Good article Rob but you missed the elephant in the room. BC's $14 billion deficit under the NDP. This is before the lumber duties kick in. BC is in serious financial danger. 4 downgrades this year, with Moody's outlook described as "bleak". Could describe Canada if the leftwing keeps power in Canada. The article perfectly describes the differences between the leaders.
>PM Mark Carney says, "We must earn our right to take from the environment while always respecting and nourishing it, and that's why a new Liberal government will pursue a bold new nature strategy with smart approaches to preserve our natural habitat and to use our finite financial resources to maximum impact.”
Listen to this bafflegab carefully, if you please.
1) We must earn our right to take from the environment . . ."
What can this mean? Who decides if we have "earned" it? Wealthy climate activists like his wife who eschew "consumerism" for others less well off than themselves? The WEF? (OK, that was tongue-in-cheek.) Who decides if, well, sorry we didn't earn it so no dice on the project we want to build? Our parents decided we didn't perform to expectation so we get sent to bed with no supper.
2) "Smart approaches . . . to use our finite financial resources to maximum impact." Is he just stating the obvious that protecting the environment costs money and requires trade-offs? But this is admitting that if you spend money on "the environment" you don't have that money for other things that Canadians say they want, like unlimited free health care, free dental care, free daycare, old-age security, indigenous reconciliation, and DEI/LGBQT rights. And if you don't earn the right to engage in economic development, where does the money come from to do any of those things, including protecting the environment? Or is the idea not to stress the environment at all by not building anything?
The reality, in my opinion, is that we need both approaches... I like a lot of what I hear of the Conservative platform, but the tone of the campaign is too close to the 47th president of the US for my taste. The uber-left undertone of Carney, and that his backroom are the same team as Trudeau, has me suspect that the Liberals, once in office, will bring out more of the same unproductive policy that will take our eye off the ball - the clear and present danger posed by the US and the upending of the world order. The general tone of Carney I find reassuring, and his connections to Europe the same, and he's navigated through tough economic waters for the last twenty years... all reassuring.
To the point of this article - of the urban-rural split that is our reality - we need the best from everyone to tend to this upending of the way things have been so that we can stick handle effectively, together, into the new reality. We need an entrepreneurial spirit that has been lacking in our citizens (save for new immigrants who are, more often than not, go getters and business establishers extraordinaire, no offense to the rest of us) if we are going to add value to our natural resources and finally move from being "hewers of wood and drawers of water." And we need government, at all levels, that can do more than announcements, but can actually get shit done.
So we need both... a tightening up of our national way of being, AND effective management of our economy and a redefined national presence, including a completely reimagined and re-established military, self-defense and alliances. We need ALL the good ideas and ALL the citizens on THE SAME PAGE. Whoever wins this election had better be on THAT page, as I think that's where most of us citizens stand, urban and rural alike. That gap isn't really as big as you think, when you peer through the lens of these dangerous times through which we are all living.
In a choice between policy and tone, avoid the temptation to pick tone. This is the attitude that is about give us at least four more years of significant pain.
It bends my mind to think that Canadians are willing to vote for a man without any idea where he stands on just about anything, with no record to judge credibility of anything that he says or promises, who was parachuted into office in the most desperately self-serving move by a party with no shame about using levers of incumbent power to tilt an election in their favour, over a longtime leader and known quantity representing real change from a highly unsuccessful and deeply unpopular era, just because the latter sometimes uses populist rhetoric.
Apologies for the epic run on sentence but I don't know how else to say it.
2019 - Sure, Justin Trudeau appeared in blackface at least 3 times, but how could he be a racist when he will always stand up for a woman's right to choose?
2021 - How can you trust conservatives to not be selfish when they don't hate anti-vaxxers?
2019 was the first one with bought and paid for media. Scheer having American citizenship is totally as bad as Trudeau's blackface incident guys!
2021 was timed during a pandemic crisis and polling bump and was run entirely on manufactured wedge issues. Anti-vaxers and gun bans oh my!
2025 was the product of should-be-illegal prorogation abuse, fake leadership race leader coronation, and timed to coincide with polling bump, international crisis, and anti-American moral panic!
The two pools of voters are the same across Canada: private sector/families vs retired/broad public sector/singles (especially students). Most of the latter group have been basically fine over the last decade - although many of the latter group want to join the first.
To the extent that they have given up hope of houses and children, or just feel like forgetting about their plight for a while, Carney can win.
"Different planets" - colourful phrase, I'll grant dramatic license, but an exaggeration. Sure, the urban population leans to different vote than rural and suburban, but in most ridings a significant number (usually more than half) voted for other than the winner, and if we were to step away from the politicians talking points we might find we are mostly more alike than not. The voting system and party rule (MLAs and MPs are pressured to uphold party line) lead many to vote by brand or leader appeal rather than the actual candidates (yes, some exceptions as described in a comment here), and we can then colour the map which emphasizes division. Troubling, as we do need ro reconcile differences and work together on greater common problems.
As to the BCC surge - sometimes seen as a BC shift to the right - not really - more of the ongoing split, but with BCC filling the space vacated by LBC/BCU - opportunity for the more conservative and more extreme parts of BCC that used be shut out, but not obviously a shift in the public.
I wonder what would happen if the many who choose not to vote would vote.
Excellent synopsis Rob of this past week of CPC & LPC campaigning in BC urban and rural: “They might as well have been on two different planets.”
I’m in one of the incumbent BC ridings that NDP Premier Eby half heartedly endorsed for NDP support: Similkameen-South Okanagan-West Kootenay.
A few days ago, I had the privilege of a Halifax NS person arguing to me on X that in my riding the Liberals will beat the NDP because that’s what a national poll showed (I think Canada 338 broken down to riding specific projections).
I tried to explain that BC is weird: outside of super wealthy urban areas (West Van, North Van, Van Central, White Rock), the Liberals are not competitive here. Our split is all NDP and Conservative in BC. The last time Vancouver Island ridings (Victoria, Nanaimo, etc) elected a Liberal was in 2008. I mean, last year pre-provincial Fall election, our long-standing prov. party the BC Liberals actually tried to completely disassociate itself from the feds by changing their name to BC United (it didn’t work, they folded entirely, and were consumed by the BC Conservatives before election).
In 2021, the Liberals came in 3rd by popular vote here (CPC 33%, NDP 29%, LPC 26%, Green5%).
BC is its own phenomenon politically.
Something too, that I think the national poll projections miss entirely, is the hyperlocal of politics, particularly in rural BC ridings. It matters here who the local candidates are and what they’ve specifically contributed to their community. In our riding, the newly placed Liberal candidate is an Indigenous leader, but from Enderby (out of riding) and not from our local Band (PIB). She will not be elected and is merely a placeholder for the LPC - they know this and have historically parachuted in a candidate, because they’re NOT competitive here. The NDP are running a well know figure (assistant to prior incumbent) and the CPC are running a long-time Penticton city councilwoman. Both good options for an area that split NDP39%, CPC38%, LPC13% in the federal 2021 election.
I’m interested to see how the leaders’ BC campaign choices play out in terms of votes and seats. Will the Liberals pick up seats on the Island from the NDP (as they obviously hope to do by campaigning in Vic)? Will the Conservatives win closely contested seats from the Interior and North like mine in Pen?
Two different planets indeed!
Bree, in my riding of West Vancouver Squamish Sunshine Coast, the NDP decided to run an 18yr old recently graduated from high school. And he was acclaimed as the candidate! The NDP seem to have given and I’ll likely give up my vote to someone else.
But how are their policies?
Jagmeet Singh is a weak leader. I am at the point of not caring about their policies. I am voting strategically. If at all.
Good article Rob but you missed the elephant in the room. BC's $14 billion deficit under the NDP. This is before the lumber duties kick in. BC is in serious financial danger. 4 downgrades this year, with Moody's outlook described as "bleak". Could describe Canada if the leftwing keeps power in Canada. The article perfectly describes the differences between the leaders.
>PM Mark Carney says, "We must earn our right to take from the environment while always respecting and nourishing it, and that's why a new Liberal government will pursue a bold new nature strategy with smart approaches to preserve our natural habitat and to use our finite financial resources to maximum impact.”
Listen to this bafflegab carefully, if you please.
1) We must earn our right to take from the environment . . ."
What can this mean? Who decides if we have "earned" it? Wealthy climate activists like his wife who eschew "consumerism" for others less well off than themselves? The WEF? (OK, that was tongue-in-cheek.) Who decides if, well, sorry we didn't earn it so no dice on the project we want to build? Our parents decided we didn't perform to expectation so we get sent to bed with no supper.
2) "Smart approaches . . . to use our finite financial resources to maximum impact." Is he just stating the obvious that protecting the environment costs money and requires trade-offs? But this is admitting that if you spend money on "the environment" you don't have that money for other things that Canadians say they want, like unlimited free health care, free dental care, free daycare, old-age security, indigenous reconciliation, and DEI/LGBQT rights. And if you don't earn the right to engage in economic development, where does the money come from to do any of those things, including protecting the environment? Or is the idea not to stress the environment at all by not building anything?
The reality, in my opinion, is that we need both approaches... I like a lot of what I hear of the Conservative platform, but the tone of the campaign is too close to the 47th president of the US for my taste. The uber-left undertone of Carney, and that his backroom are the same team as Trudeau, has me suspect that the Liberals, once in office, will bring out more of the same unproductive policy that will take our eye off the ball - the clear and present danger posed by the US and the upending of the world order. The general tone of Carney I find reassuring, and his connections to Europe the same, and he's navigated through tough economic waters for the last twenty years... all reassuring.
To the point of this article - of the urban-rural split that is our reality - we need the best from everyone to tend to this upending of the way things have been so that we can stick handle effectively, together, into the new reality. We need an entrepreneurial spirit that has been lacking in our citizens (save for new immigrants who are, more often than not, go getters and business establishers extraordinaire, no offense to the rest of us) if we are going to add value to our natural resources and finally move from being "hewers of wood and drawers of water." And we need government, at all levels, that can do more than announcements, but can actually get shit done.
So we need both... a tightening up of our national way of being, AND effective management of our economy and a redefined national presence, including a completely reimagined and re-established military, self-defense and alliances. We need ALL the good ideas and ALL the citizens on THE SAME PAGE. Whoever wins this election had better be on THAT page, as I think that's where most of us citizens stand, urban and rural alike. That gap isn't really as big as you think, when you peer through the lens of these dangerous times through which we are all living.
Thanks for this. Good article.
Carney is reassuring only if you aim for penury.
In a choice between policy and tone, avoid the temptation to pick tone. This is the attitude that is about give us at least four more years of significant pain.
It bends my mind to think that Canadians are willing to vote for a man without any idea where he stands on just about anything, with no record to judge credibility of anything that he says or promises, who was parachuted into office in the most desperately self-serving move by a party with no shame about using levers of incumbent power to tilt an election in their favour, over a longtime leader and known quantity representing real change from a highly unsuccessful and deeply unpopular era, just because the latter sometimes uses populist rhetoric.
Apologies for the epic run on sentence but I don't know how else to say it.
Canada hasn't had a serious election since 2011
The last few ballot box questions have been:
2015 - Is Harper mean?
2019 - Sure, Justin Trudeau appeared in blackface at least 3 times, but how could he be a racist when he will always stand up for a woman's right to choose?
2021 - How can you trust conservatives to not be selfish when they don't hate anti-vaxxers?
2025 - Is Trump a jerk?
And not a legitimate election since 2015.
2019 was the first one with bought and paid for media. Scheer having American citizenship is totally as bad as Trudeau's blackface incident guys!
2021 was timed during a pandemic crisis and polling bump and was run entirely on manufactured wedge issues. Anti-vaxers and gun bans oh my!
2025 was the product of should-be-illegal prorogation abuse, fake leadership race leader coronation, and timed to coincide with polling bump, international crisis, and anti-American moral panic!
I really like what you say at the beginning of your last paragraph....So...
And if you really believe what you wrote, you cannot vote Liberal
The two pools of voters are the same across Canada: private sector/families vs retired/broad public sector/singles (especially students). Most of the latter group have been basically fine over the last decade - although many of the latter group want to join the first.
To the extent that they have given up hope of houses and children, or just feel like forgetting about their plight for a while, Carney can win.
And then grim reality will hit them again.
"Different planets" - colourful phrase, I'll grant dramatic license, but an exaggeration. Sure, the urban population leans to different vote than rural and suburban, but in most ridings a significant number (usually more than half) voted for other than the winner, and if we were to step away from the politicians talking points we might find we are mostly more alike than not. The voting system and party rule (MLAs and MPs are pressured to uphold party line) lead many to vote by brand or leader appeal rather than the actual candidates (yes, some exceptions as described in a comment here), and we can then colour the map which emphasizes division. Troubling, as we do need ro reconcile differences and work together on greater common problems.
As to the BCC surge - sometimes seen as a BC shift to the right - not really - more of the ongoing split, but with BCC filling the space vacated by LBC/BCU - opportunity for the more conservative and more extreme parts of BCC that used be shut out, but not obviously a shift in the public.
I wonder what would happen if the many who choose not to vote would vote.